A court-martial, a legal proceeding for military members similar to a civilian court trial, at Burnham Military Camp, 30km south of Christchurch, has been hearing the officer’s case since Monday.
The officer, who has interim name suppression, faces one charge of sexual violation and three charges of assault. He has admitted to pouring a can of Red Bull over the woman and slapping her face on one occasion in 2017 but is defending the third charge of assault, alleged to be another slap to her face, and the sexual violation.
The Crown claimed the offending he denied occurred in a hotel room, after the pair agreed to meet for a “rough” sexual experience, one month after the offending he has admitted.
The officer is charged under the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971 and Crimes Act 1961 and appeared before Judge Kevin Riordan and a panel of military members.
On Thursday, Crown prosecutor Kerry White gave her closing address in the case. She opened her statement with the last message the officer sent to the woman before the alleged sexual violation occurred.
“Good luck sl*t, you’re going to get what you deserve,” the message read.
White said it was clear from his messages the officer was “furious” in the lead-up to the alleged offending, rejecting the defence’s argument that he had calmed down by the night at the hotel.
The Crown’s case is that while the woman consented to sex with the man, she withdrew her consent during the act.
White said when the woman tried to pull away from the officer, she grabbed his hand which was holding her in place. But he wouldn’t let go and only stopped when she vomited, she claimed.
The officer would have realised the woman had withdrawn her consent, White alleged, and his claim that she didn’t show any sign of not enjoying it should not be accepted.
White also said the alleged slap the officer delivered across the woman’s face when he first arrived at the hotel had not been agreed upon by the pair and should therefore be considered assault.
The Crown questioned the officer’s credibility, pointing out he initially lied to investigators about the first set of offending before later pleading guilty.
White finished her closing statement by asking the military members to consider evidence given by the doctor who said “if she wasn’t being held, I would imagine she would have pulled away”.
The officer’s lawyer, Elizabeth Bulger, said just because the doctor agreed the woman being held in place was likely a factor that led to her vomiting, this did not mean the sexual encounter wasn’t consensual.
She claimed the woman lied about being slapped by the officer when he entered the hotel room and that the only slapping that occurred was consensual and during sex.
Bulger said the officer sent messages to the woman assuring her everything would stay within the “consensual realm” and while he was angry beforehand, he had calmed down by the time he saw her at the hotel.
She claimed the woman showed no signs of wanting to stop during the encounter and when she vomited it was a surprise to both her and the officer.
Bulger went on to say the timing of the woman’s complaint was “suspicious” as she came forward shortly after the officer told her he knew she was allegedly being investigated for an unrelated matter.
She said the woman had the motive to make up the allegations in an effort to take attention away from her own “bad behaviour”.
Bulger finished her closing statement by saying the woman went into the sexual encounter with “open eyes”.
She knew what to expect from the boundaries set out by the officer - boundaries that weren’t crossed, Bulger added.
The military members began deliberations this afternoon and are yet to deliver their verdict.
